View Full Version : Arnesen to Chelsea????? Spurs seeking legal advice
Lillywhite
04 Jun 2005, 11:59 AM
Frank said he wanted to join the rent boys possibly after an illegal approach. Spurs suspended him immediately. I mean screwing the scum is one thing but this is getting personal.
I'm not actually all that shocked. Things seemed to be going a little too smoothly as of late.
guddy69
04 Jun 2005, 12:05 PM
Frank said he wanted to join the rent boys possibly after an illegal approach. Spurs suspended him immediately. I mean screwing the scum is one thing but this is getting personal.
I'm not actually all that shocked. Things seemed to be going a little too smoothly as of late.
I dont mind, i think he will be an asset at chelsea, he was too good for lowly spuds anyway..
astabooty
04 Jun 2005, 12:06 PM
I dont mind i think he will be an asset at chelsea, he was too good for lowly spuds anyway..
you are completely missing the point.
OrlandoSPUR
04 Jun 2005, 12:45 PM
I dont mind, i think he will be an asset at chelsea, he was too good for lowly spuds anyway..
Well thank god the Russian Don took pity on you boys two seasons ago or you would be playing QPR in the Championship.
Chelski are getting way to big for their boots, firstly in the way they got Kenyon, then trying to get every player in the world, tapping up an Arse* player and now doing the same thing with our Dir of Football. Hope you all are happy together in your West London Brothel.
The Blood money will soon run out. :mad:
guddy69
04 Jun 2005, 01:38 PM
you are completely missing the point.
CHELSEA OFFICIALLY APPROACHED SPURS 3 WEEKS AGO...
ARNESON RESIGNED BECAUSE SPURS WOULD NOT LET HIM SPEAK TO CHELSEA.. NOT SURE IF ANY DODGY DEALINGS ARE GOING ON HERE OR NOT?
Walter3000
04 Jun 2005, 01:39 PM
Well thank god the Russian Don took pity on you boys two seasons ago or you would be playing QPR in the Championship.
Chelski are getting way to big for their boots, firstly in the way they got Kenyon, then trying to get every player in the world, tapping up an Arse* player and now doing the same thing with our Dir of Football. Hope you all are happy together in your West London Brothel.
The Blood money will soon run out. :mad:
The money wont run out, sorry to burst your fantasy, with or without money, we'll still be taking points from the Spurs as usual.
OrlandoSPUR
04 Jun 2005, 01:52 PM
The money wont run out, sorry to burst your fantasy, with or without money, we'll still be taking points from the Spurs as usual.
Damn that money. And damn your domination over us. ;)
Clan
04 Jun 2005, 02:36 PM
CHELSEA OFFICIALLY APPROACHED SPURS 3 WEEKS AGO...
ARNESON RESIGNED BECAUSE SPURS WOULD NOT LET HIM SPEAK TO CHELSEA.. NOT SURE IF ANY DODGY DEALINGS ARE GOING ON HERE OR NOT?
Did he resign, or get the boot?
Clan
04 Jun 2005, 02:37 PM
Well thank god the Russian Don took pity on you boys two seasons ago or you would be playing QPR in the Championship.
Would it be childish to point out that we have been turning your lot over for years - most of them before his money :D
Lillywhite
04 Jun 2005, 02:47 PM
How can Spurs suspend him if he's already resigned? I guess the gutless little sh** didn't resign. After all he's a **** who wouldn't want to be without a healthy income until he's sure of his next paycheck.
Flash2
04 Jun 2005, 04:26 PM
Would it be childish to point out that we have been turning your lot over for years - most of them before his money :D
We could say the same for both you and spurs.
musicl
04 Jun 2005, 06:32 PM
I dont mind, i think he will be an asset at chelsea, he was too good for lowly spuds anyway..lol look at the history books.
Clan
04 Jun 2005, 08:27 PM
lol look at the history books.
Still reading all the rewriting Chelsea Football Club forced this year ;)
Clan
04 Jun 2005, 08:28 PM
We could say the same for both you and spurs.
Fair enough, but, i think i would hedge any and all bets on us (against both North London clubs) for the foreseeable future :)
Colm
05 Jun 2005, 07:46 AM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/t/tottenham_hotspur/4610893.stm well former league chief has accused Chelsea of being Arrogent. I think he is right, Chelsea have behaved arrogently through out the Cole case and now this.
but this bit below caught my eye
"I think Frank Arnesen, having secured a very good job in certain circumstances, has been rather disloyal to Tottenham - if he now needs to go and he is obviously going for one reason," added Pleat.
"When Frank was thinking of retiring from PSV, Tottenham came along and I introduced him to them, to speak to him about how the football director relationship works.
"They came back and were obviously quite seduced by Frank, gave Frank a terrific opportunity here to continue his career in that role, gave him a contract at whatever money and was more than happy to come. "Now a few months later, he is more than happy to go and that stinks a little bit, doesn't it?"
I agree with that statment there, Arnesen has been a bit disloyal to spurs.
i would of probably been given a neg rep posting that on the Chelsea forum.
Clan
05 Jun 2005, 09:10 AM
Things are not right with somebody in the upper ranks of the way CFC are conducting business.
I blame that bloody manc turncoat myself.
He (thankfully) made a pigs ear of the whole Sven thing, made a mockery of the way the club handled Ranieri and chose a hotel foyer to conduct a 'meeting' with another contrated player.Whether or not said player initiated the meeting isn't my point.Surely he could have picked a more discreet location.
However, that being said, this is the part of that link that made me laugh.
"I left last year in May and the following day Frank Arnesen was in place, so exactly the same thing happened when he left PSV Eindhoven."
You know, the Yanks have a great saying, very fitting in this case.
What goes around, comes around ;)
sendorange
05 Jun 2005, 10:14 AM
Ahh but in Arnesen's case his contract was ending at PSV and they had agreed to let him go because they wanted to give Hiddink more control. There was no poaching involved.
Clan
05 Jun 2005, 10:44 AM
Ahh but in Arnesen's case his contract was ending at PSV and they had agreed to let him go because they wanted to give Hiddink more control. There was no poaching involved.
Perhaps.
But Pleat doesn't seem to think thats the way it was.
As for 'no poaching' prior to his leaving, you simply can't state that as a fact.
If his contract was ending, 'agreeing' to let him go would be moot eh?
sendorange
05 Jun 2005, 10:51 AM
Perhaps.
But Pleat doesn't seem to think thats the way it was.
As for 'no poaching' prior to his leaving, you simply can't state that as a fact.
If his contract was ending, 'agreeing' to let him go would be moot eh?
No, Pleat is upset because the club did not tell him earlier that they had agreed for Arnesen to replace him. There is nothing illegal there and it would be a mistake for any employer to do that to someone in a high level position, too much potential for the incumbant to cause trouble.
I can state that Arnesen was not poached as a fact, because PSV had told him they wanted Hiddink to have more control long and they weren't keeping him involved on the sporting director side before Tottenham even spoke to him. Feel free to check the PSV site for the articles.
Clan
05 Jun 2005, 10:55 AM
No, Pleat is upset because the club did not tell him earlier that they had agreed for Arnesen to replace him. There is nothing illegal there and it would be a mistake for any employer to do that to someone in a high level position, too much potential for the incumbant to cause trouble.
I can state that Arnesen was not poached as a fact, because PSV had told him they wanted Hiddink to have more control long and they weren't keeping him involved on the sporting director side before Tottenham even spoke to him. Feel free to check the PSV site for the articles.
No. No need for that, i'll take your word for it.
I never followed the Arnesen to Spurs story with any interest.